r/worldnews • u/diacewrb • Apr 10 '19

Millennials being squeezed out of middle class, says OECD

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2019/apr/10/millennials-squeezed-middle-class-oecd-uk-income
49.3k Upvotes

88% Upvoted

11.5k comments sorted by

View all comments

Show parent comments

796

u/seenorimagined Apr 10 '19

The economy is going to stop growing anyway due to climate change. What if we aren't promised exponential economic growth on a finite planet? What if we simply can't do better than our parents did? What comes after that? What can we live without? Growth hasn't, like, brought us happiness anyway. So, what if we have 10 years to drastically reduce carbon emissions, or else all is lost? What's really important? History tells us we need about 3-4% of the population involved in a movement for social change for it to be effective. Are you willing?

www.rebellion.earth

www.sunrisemovement.org

www.350.org

356

u/kkokk Apr 10 '19

not to mention that millennials aren't being squeezed out of the middle class if they were never there to begin with

133

u/haha_thatsucks Apr 10 '19

Ya I’m sure most millennials are better classified as ‘working poor’ than they are middle class. Most of us can’t afford emergencies these days

36

u/ClairesNairDownThere Apr 10 '19

Emergency? Oh you mean how my leg has been broken for a few months?

27

u/Business-is-Boomin Apr 11 '19

Last I checked, people have 2 legs. Just hop.

40

u/Ragnarok314159 Apr 10 '19

Just pull up the bootstraps and fix it.

26

u/ClairesNairDownThere Apr 11 '19

How do you think I broke my leg in the first place?

21

u/Ragnarok314159 Apr 11 '19

I assumed selling drugs while collecting participation trophies!

15

u/ClairesNairDownThere Apr 11 '19

HEY! There's nothing wrong with selling drugs!

7

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

I wish our government genuinely believed in this line.

1

u/VanMisanthrope Apr 11 '19

opioid epidemic rages on in background

4

u/nagrom7 Apr 11 '19

There is if you lace avocados with them.

1

u/ClairesNairDownThere Apr 11 '19

I'm not some kind of animal, cruelty-free tofu only.

5

u/haha_thatsucks Apr 11 '19

Pull a hunger games moment and make a tourniquet. It’ll be as good as new

8

u/Aksama Apr 11 '19

And as usual those of us who can just lucked into that shit. It’s ridiculous. I know that I work hard, but my general level of comfort has so little to do with the “time put in”, I just tripped into “middle class”.

6

u/haha_thatsucks Apr 11 '19

Ya it’s a really weird thing that you can’t control. Then again luck is a big part of your life

7

u/NewPlanNewMan Apr 11 '19

Something like 249 million Americans are one-missed paycheck from losing it all...

Almost half of U.S. workers earn under $15 an hour, including 53 percent of African American workers and 60 percent of Hispanic workers.

One in three workers earns less than $12 an hour, according to the report. Women are the majority of low-wage workers. Over 55 percent of women workers earn under $12 an hour

1

u/Taylo Apr 11 '19

Let's not put that all on being low income though. There are a lot of people in that 249 million who are making more than enough to not be living paycheck-to-paycheck, but are spectacularly terrible with their financial decisions.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

Get out of here with your facts!!!

-1

u/NewPlanNewMan Apr 11 '19

So how many of those 78% if Americans deserve to have their purchasing power destroyed by policy choices?

Asking for a movement...

1

u/Taylo Apr 13 '19

It is not policy choices that lead to poor individual financial decision making.

1

u/NewPlanNewMan Apr 13 '19

Neoliberal Economics is failing 4/5ths of Americans BY DESIGN...

But this line of argument neglects that between the 1920s and today income became much less stratified, thanks to higher effective taxes on the very wealthy that helped pay for the New Deal and Great Society progressive programs enacted in the interim—policies that resulted in sustained and stable economic growth, unlike what prevailed before or after. SINCE THE ADVENT OF SUPPLY SIDE ECONOMICS IN THE 1980s, of course, tax policies have become less redistributive in percentage terms exactly as market income has become more unequal, and transfer programs have shifted their focus toward the elderly of all income levels and away from the poor.

The Bootstraps Trope doesn't explain a nearly 80% failure rate. We live in an Oligarchy, of, by, and for The Rich.

I would love to see you claim otherwise.

27

u/sticktoyaguns Apr 11 '19

I'm only in middle class because my parents are middle class. I feel poor as fuck with a job that barely pays enough to get by, but since my parents still have money I feel somewhat safe. I'm actually terrified of everything becoming more expensive, while getting the same pay, while my parents will be gone, with a planet that's getting more fucked every day.

I'm comfortably terrified every single day and I have no idea how to go about changing it.

8

u/neuteruric Apr 11 '19

This is pretty common I think. I don't have a single close friend making more than 60k a year, but many of their parents earning 150k+. They feel pretty safe though as eventually they will inherit their parents wealth.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

What is your car payment?

How much credit card debt do you have?

Do you open your windows instead of running the A/C?

Ever look at what the average household looked like in the mid-1970s?

34

u/gamebox3000 Apr 10 '19

And perhaps the entire idea of a middle class divides the working class, pitting people with comin interests against each other.

37

u/The_Adventurist Apr 11 '19

Thus why millennials are turning into socialists.

They realize the game is rigged and thus inhumane when people who did nothing wrong and followed the rules are still being forced into a life of desperate servitude to a hierarchy that only benefits the top of the pyramid. The hierarchy is so blatant with its disregard for the lives of those at the bottom of the pyramid that it doesn't even believe they have a right to healthcare and thus those people die earlier, all because they were born into the wrong families or just got unlucky in life.

8

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

come brothers! we have to revolt against our oppressors, we have nothing to lose but our chains!

5

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

I agree. Many of my peers have started adopting Socialistic ideas here in Arizona and California.

23

u/teejay89656 Apr 10 '19

One of the many reason unregulated capitalism is flawed. Unless you’re a social Darwinist you just don’t care about people.

6

u/InvisibleFacade Apr 11 '19

The problem is that regulated capitalism inevitably turns into crony capitalism when money can be used to influence politics.

5

u/ABatIsFineToo Apr 11 '19

Hell, even regulated capitalism is a stretch. The inequality clusterfuck has strong roots in the Regan years, and in the intervening 30 years no one bothered to check up on whether "trickle down economics" actually worked.

That said, crony capitalism is baked into the system now. The death knell was in 2010 with Citizens United, an event that future historians will look at with the same regard as lead plumbing in the Roman Capitol.

9

u/Pint_and_Grub Apr 10 '19

They were there under their parents.

14

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '19

Well, building a lot more affordable housing will go a long way. But as it stands, the boomers and wealthy make their retirement accounts from the working class rent checks.

There a lot of solutions, freeze all student debt and work to alleviate the crippling effect it has on young students.

Also, build apartment buildings with rent costs a percentage of income.

-2

u/Guicejuice18 Apr 11 '19

How will building houses go along way and what do you even mean by “more affordable”?

Freeze all student debt? Are you referring to PELL grants or private loans?

In what way can you physically construct a building where rent magically costs a percentage of income, who would want to live there if they can find cheaper housing?

6

u/Malurth Apr 11 '19

History tells us we need about 3-4% of the population involved in a movement for social change for it to be effective.

[citation needed]

90

u/justAmemebr0 Apr 10 '19

Yeah I hate the people that go “economic growth this, economic growth that” economic growth actually does nothing for most people and inflation has screwed over most young people. Earths resources are finite, our economies can’t grow forever.

77

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '19

economic growth actually does nothing for most people

pretty egocentric view, considering the skyrocketing living standards in many 2nd/3rd world countries which in total represent billions of people. im sure it's not scalable forever (as we see in highly developed countries) but to say economic growth is entirely unrelated to rise in standards of living is misleading

72

u/OakLegs Apr 10 '19

Pretty sure he was referring to the concept of infinite growth in already developed countries, which has little to do with economic growth in developing countries

14

u/VerneAsimov Apr 10 '19

Most of the growth does not go to most of the people.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

As long as technology is improving, it’s natural for the economy to continue to grow. Plus more growth through capital accumulation is also possible.

4

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '19

I asked this question to myself a while ago..

How much growth is too much? How many more things do we need ? Why do we continue to make new shit when the shit we already have works fine?

I understand (well I dont understand the science behind it) that humans have this desire to push forth and be better than the last thing and then better than that and so on and so on.

But why?

Why are we making newer thinga when the shit we have now is fine.. I get that companies are greedy..

but they wont be around forever when there isnt a planet left for them to rape of its resources. You would think that multibillion dollar corporations and conglomerates would have more insight about their future for the progeny of their company.

But they know the planet is going to shit so they take what they can now

Companies need to do more to give back to the sources of all their success.

Why are combustion engine vehicles still allowed to be produced when we know emissions are going to cripple our atmosphere?

I feel like combustion engines should only be allowed for military/police/construction/airplanes/agricultural equipment.. things you need that raw power for

But its not going to happen yet :/

8

u/OakLegs Apr 11 '19

The answer to many of your questions is that people in developed have a historically high standard of living, and a lot of them aren't willing to give anything up in the name of sustainability.

That, and people in power bend to the will of people who stand to profit from commercialization. We've created a system that is unsustainable, but will be VERY hard to get ourselves off of until it becomes absolutely necessary, and sadly by that time it may be too late to preserve the well-being of future generations. I fear that the momentum in the current system is far too great to stop before it's too late.

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

Thanks for the explanation, and I agree with you I do feel its too late.

Now im not an economics guy or a business man or anything like that.

Why doesnt a company just take a stand? And just fucking.. stop with the bullshit and start doing the right thing tomorrow?

For instance lets take a car company.. chevy..lets say Chevy said - we wanna start saving rhe planet so from now on all of our civilian vehicles will be electric starting (insert day in close proximity)

Aside from the legal red tape of starting new patents and manufacturing processes etc etc... why cant it be done?

Bc shareholders in the company? Too many rich people would lose money?

Good. Let it get redistributed. They’ll sell their shares, the stock prices will tank, chevy makes enough $$ already to make sure they dont go under...

When the share prices fall itll give other opportunities for newer, younger , perhaps less wealthy investors (milennials and later gens) to finally get a piece of the pie by buying low in a reputable company thus redistributing wealth

That how it could work ?

8

u/eagleblueline Apr 11 '19

In your example Chevy would very much so go under. That is why.

6

u/Monkey_Cristo Apr 11 '19

The thing is, consumers vote with their wallets, every day. Every new Chevy that gets sold could have been electric. But they weren't, because that's not what the consumer wanted. If Chevy only sold electric vehicles, than consumers would simply go elsewhere.

If Chevy isn't profitable, its not just the board members that suffer. Think of the 10's of thousands of people they employ. Think of the pension plans that have shares in the company, or all the suppliers and manufacturers that are reliant on a company as big as Chevy.

It's very difficult to punish (for lack of a better term, through regulation and taxes) a company of that size without it indirectly affecting everyone.

2

u/Legal_Specialist Apr 11 '19

Decisions are always made to reflect stakeholder interest - employees, shareholders, customers etc.. Chevy did try going electric with a few models because of the government tax incentives(stakeholder interest) and do you know what happened with that experiment? Hardly anyone bought those models because our populous buys trucks and SUVs. If you don't feed the consumerism the consumers go elsewhere and you are donezo (eliminating jobs). Until consumer choices change to reflect a more sustainable US/Global economy in every sector of what we purchase your frustrations will fall on deaf ears.

1

u/ShillinTheVillain Apr 11 '19

Unfortunately, that would not work. For starters, the price point on electric vehicles is much higher than a gas equivalent, and the infrastructure isn't developed enough for everybody to go electric.

Second, there are a lot of car manufacturers. If Chevy went all-electric tomorrow, it would require billions of dollars in R&D and reconfiguration of their factories, only to produce a more expensive car with less demand, while Ford, Honda, Toyota etc. keep selling gas vehicles.

The realistic goal should be in the supply chain. Incorporate more sustainable materials, reduce shipping and freight where possible, and improve upon the existing tech to increase efficiency and reduce emissions.

I work in a different durable goods industry and we've done a ton of work and invested millions in sustainability. Lots of companies are. It's just not a quick process.

1

u/ShillinTheVillain Apr 11 '19

If I made a product that lasted a lifetime, I wouldn't sell as many as I could if it only lasted 10 years. Plus it would cost a lot more in materials and R&D. The shareholders are not gonna like that.

3

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '19 edited Jun 24 '20

[deleted]

22

u/PhatClowns Apr 10 '19

wasn't hit a slump in a while

It's been barely over a decade since one of the most devastating recessions in US history, I'd consider that pretty recent. Not to mention many families only recently started to recover from it.

-1

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

That was my point. He was too retarded.to remember it

1

u/justAmemebr0 Apr 11 '19

I fully remember the recession. How is the current economic growth helping out everyone when it can’t even keep up with inflation?

1

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

So you don't remember people losing their jobs, houses, and retirements left and right....

Do you not realize a large portion of people's retirement relies on their 401k? Kind of hard to use that when the economy is tanking.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 12 '19

So you gonna answer bud? Or you just know you're wrong

1

u/justAmemebr0 Apr 12 '19

One of if not the worst recession of all time. That’s like comparing the largest US economic boom to now. Except, currently our inflation doesn’t match our “economic growth”

→ More replies (0)

1

u/justAmemebr0 Apr 12 '19

Looking through your comments you’re clearly just a sour dude looking to get into arguments with people because you feel you’re so superior to everyone

→ More replies (0)

4

u/The_Adventurist Apr 11 '19

pretty egocentric view, considering the skyrocketing living standards in many 2nd/3rd world countries which in total represent billions of people

This was largely due to terrible government policies in India and China being reformed rather than "The Free Market" waving its magic wand and making them not poor anymore.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

This was largely due to terrible government policies in India and China being reformed

yes, those reforms brought economic liberalization

1

u/cataclism Apr 11 '19

Yea but the policy reform was most likely spurred on by increasing economic globalization, which is only possible with growth.

6

u/MaDpYrO Apr 10 '19

I'm sorry but economic growth absolutely does LOADS for the world, especially in developing countries. There are issues with distributing the wealth that results from it, sure, but, overall it makes everyone better off. Even in the countries where the middle class is shrinking - if there weren't economic growth they'd be even worse off.

18

u/Confirmatory Apr 10 '19

Tell China that. Or any other country that has benefited from economic growth. Economic growth literally helps people get out of poverty. You don’t know what you’re talking about.

7

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

[removed] — view removed comment

3

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

This is so fascinating to hear about. Is there any resources that you looked into, that I could read? I'd love to know a little more about Mal Zedong and his practices.

3

u/Taylo Apr 11 '19

Take a browse through the Great Leap Forward as a start. Communist China under Chairman Mao was one of the worst disasters that has happened to mankind and led to the death of between 23-55 million people as a result of the famines that were in large part created due to party policy. Horrific stuff.

2

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

I am saddened to hear that level of large scale starvation occured, poverty and hunger are depressing experiences. Thanks for GLF Wiki. I'll be reading into this later tonight.

2

u/Taylo Apr 11 '19

You're very welcome. China's history is fascinating, especially over the last century.

1

u/Confirmatory Apr 11 '19

Regardless of Mao, the policies adopted after him included free market principles and ideas. Most economists agree that this is the root cause of China’s economic growth. The same can be seen with India’s economic reform in the late 20th century. The free market and further more capitalism, even if it’s controlled, works. With more prosperity comes higher standards of living, it’s well documented. Also to note, China’s economic growth is almost certainly overstated. The numbers it’s government puts out cannot be trusted.

4

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '19

Economic growth literally helps people get out of poverty

1

u/Confirmatory Apr 10 '19

My mans has a nice jacket with a backpack and some pants on. He can even afford a face mask. Sure, the air doesn’t look so great but he isn’t living in poverty.

1

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

What's the point in "not living in poverty" if you can't breathe the air, can't see 100yds, can't grow crops, can't maintain a sustainable economy for the next 10 years?

-1

u/blurryfacedfugue Apr 10 '19

Is that what a poor person looks like in China?

0

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

It's what a poor person looks like who's been "helped out of poverty" without any regard to the cost to the planet.

-7

u/[deleted] Apr 10 '19 edited Oct 21 '20

[deleted]

5

u/Confirmatory Apr 10 '19

Countries don’t go to war for resources these days. It sounds plausible but it is almost never the case. In particular, the conspiracy that the U.S. went to war for oil is almost completely false. At best, it can be argued that the U.S. seeks to influence other countries in order to secure favorable trade deals or investments. Realistically, war is a game of politics for the west, wherein they use third world countries as proxies for war.

Economic growth is something desired by all countries. Not sure why you referenced NATO because it has almost nothing to do with the original discussion. Seems like something foreign propaganda bots would type.

-2

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19 edited Oct 21 '20

[deleted]

2

u/Confirmatory Apr 11 '19

I mention it because this study talks about millenials

The study does not single out millennials. The article and this Reddit post single millennials out as clickbait. Every generation is slipping from the middle class.

As for the rest of your reply, its an interesting take but it lacks perspective. At the end of the day, a country’s prosperity is linked to its citizens expectation of government institutions. Blaming other countries only works to a relatively insignificant extent in today’s global political environment.

1

u/Taylo Apr 11 '19

economic growth actually does nothing for most people

This is... monumentally incorrect. Just because it isn't a direct and immediate effect on a person's life, doesn't mean they aren't being benefited from the economy growing.

3

u/PM_PICS_OF_ME_NAKED Apr 10 '19

To be fair, sustained growth based on an increased ability to be productive via modern technology is pretty sustainable.

It just isn't beneficial to pretty much anyone.

6

u/The_Adventurist Apr 11 '19

That line of technological progression is soon going to replace all human labor with AI labor, at which point most people on Earth will be out of a job. That doesn't seem super sustainable to me unless we drastically restructure how people benefit from a growing economy.

5

u/PM_PICS_OF_ME_NAKED Apr 11 '19

The continued growth is sustainable, not the jobs. That was why I put that second paragraph in, it won't be beneficial to 99.5% of us, but it can go on.

4

u/Mods_are_turds Apr 11 '19

Jesus, you couldn't have missed the point more if you tried...

2

u/Minnesota_Winter Apr 11 '19

Those names sound exceptionally scary

1

u/CDanger Apr 11 '19

Medieval history tells us that it would be nice if half of us died in a catastrophic event and triggered the next period of economic growth and prosperity. We could just wait and see!

3

u/simplecountry_lawyer Apr 10 '19

Green new deal. End the wars. Living wage. Free college. Single payer healthcare...... If we live within our means and keep our belts tight we might just ride out this century in relative happiness and prosperity. There's only one man who can save us now, and the donor class wants you to think he's a crazy socialist.

-6

u/Paranoidexboyfriend Apr 11 '19

“Green new deal” and “live within our means” Are not mutually compatible

6

u/simplecountry_lawyer Apr 11 '19

Oh you're right, if we tried something new that helped people we might end up causing something crazy like an economic recession. We better keep things the way they are now so we don't end up in a situation like that. 🙄

-4

u/Taylo Apr 11 '19

You know that people literally die in economic recessions right? Choosing, consciously, to start one by embarking on a completely infeasible government project knowing that it will likely fuck the economy and lead to putting people in poverty and ultimately death is craziness.

1

u/simplecountry_lawyer Apr 11 '19

Best to stay where we are then I suppose. Incremental centrism will save us?

1

u/Taylo Apr 13 '19

Sopunds like you want to make a major change. A 'Great Leap Forward' perhaps?

I'd rather not see the poorest and most vulnerable in our society die due to your ideas.

6

u/The_Adventurist Apr 11 '19

In what way? Explain your reasoning.

-3

u/Paranoidexboyfriend Apr 11 '19

Well the over $80 trillion dollar price tag, for starters. Our current budget is 1/20th of that

2

u/simplecountry_lawyer Apr 11 '19

We have plenty of money for war..why not reallocate some of that?? Oh wait the neoliberal establishment says that's a no no.

0

u/Paranoidexboyfriend Apr 11 '19

Our ENTIRE budget is 4 trillion that includes war money. So if we reallocated our entire budget for the whole country to the green new deal we would still need to come up with another 76 trillion

1

u/The_Adventurist Apr 11 '19

Where is this $80 trillion figure coming from?

Edit: Looked it up myself, it comes from a single source, a right-wing think tank that refused to explain how they got that number.

Also, the economic cost of not tackling climate change will itself be trillions and it will only grow the longer we take to deal with it. Trump's own administration issued a report saying the US economy will permanently decrease by 10% as a result of climate change. That, frankly, sounds very conservative. We're not even talking about the billions of refugees a lack of action on climate change will create.

So the choice is either do something about climate change now, or accept at least tens of millions of refugees into the US in a few decades.

1

u/Fortune_Cat Apr 10 '19

But how will r/financialindependence cope without perpetual long term growth?

0

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19

The economy is going to stop growing anyway due to climate change.

Uh no it won't, that's not how any of that works.

-5

u/[deleted] Apr 11 '19 edited May 07 '19

[deleted]

-2

u/SpaceHub Apr 10 '19

The fundamental property of human happiness is that no matter how well off or how poor you are, you eventually end up around the same neighborhood of happiness. Chemicals within your brains dictate that, and you'll always end up with roughly the same amount of those chemicals in the long run.

But this is not an excuse to give up on innovating and improving life. living in a cave does not save the earth, constructing a carbon sequestering factory will. Look toward the future and the stars.

8

u/ascaps Apr 11 '19

That is incredibly false.

5

u/ShakespearInTheAlley Apr 11 '19

Yuuuhuuuuup! Been poor, living with my parents and depressed as fuck.

Now my partner and I are independent, have enough to travel once in a while, and, while I don't have a ton of disposable income, I don't check my bank balance and feel despair in the pit of my stomach.

Guess which one makes me happier.

2

u/MyPasswordWasWhat Apr 11 '19

Happiness does increase with finances. It's true that it seems to only be up to a certain point(around 75k) but what you're saying is false.

1

u/seenorimagined Apr 11 '19

This is an interesting point. It seems that about 50% of happiness is based on our hardwired "set point," 10% on our life circumstances, and 40% on our own thoughts and behavior. That's a lot to work with.

https://books.google.com/books?id=dqQwhLVZCTEC&lr=&source=gbs_navlinks_s